gkempf
Well-Known Member
Was wondering what the 26 Nosler really has over the 264 Win. Mag. And also how is the barrel life on the Nosler. Thanks guys
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
26 Nosler vrs. 264 Win. Mag.
- Thread starter gkempf
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
dgr416
Well-Known Member
With the current brass shortage I would go with a 264 win mag .I have t two 264 win mags that I make brass out of 7 mm REM mag brass.I got it she it was cheap abd stocked up 3000 pcs.The 26 nolser can be made out of the 28 nosler Which is about $2 each or more .Its about 200 fps faster than a 24 inch 264 won mag but stick a 28 inch barrel on a 264 win mag and there will be very little difference .The factory ammo for the 26 nosler has been way slower than it says .The 264 can be loaded up but the 26 nosler is at its peak .I don't think the barrel life can be 1000 rounds with the 26 nosler .I extended the barrel life in my 264 wm by using a heavier bullet 155 gr lapula mega tip that knocks stuff flat out to 500 yards .I would use a 140 be burger for longer shots .I just don't see the worth of a 26 nosler unless your going to buy barrels often abd have stock in nosler
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
I'll tell you what the .26 Nosler has over the .264 WinMag...
1) Significantly shorter barrel life than the .264WM.
2) More expensive and significantly fewer brass brand options compared to the .264WM.
3) Less published load data readily available.
4) Owned by probably less than 1% of the number of people who own or have owned a .264 WinMag since its creation in the 1950's.
5) Burns more powder than the .264WM.
264WM
Well-Known Member
With the right powder and bullet combo the 264 WM is right there with the 26 and like said cheaper to load for. I do live in the danger zone with my 264WM with a 30" Shilen barrel with 1 in 8 twist. I have managed 3269 fps with the 160gr Woodleigh bullet and 3830fps with the Sierra 85gr HP. One other advantage is less recoil than the 26 relating to less flinch.
D
Deleted member 46119
Guest
Mud and 264WM are right.
The 26 Nosler is silly overbore. No way to know for certain how long a barrel with last but if your careless you could torch the barrel in an afternoon.
We has hand loaders can match the "flat to 400 yards" + ballistics with more than one chambering.
What the 26 does have is for non-hand loaders to have a round that will do the "flat to 400" from factory guns with factory ammo.
It's much better as a 7mm or bigger.
The 26 Nosler is silly overbore. No way to know for certain how long a barrel with last but if your careless you could torch the barrel in an afternoon.
We has hand loaders can match the "flat to 400 yards" + ballistics with more than one chambering.
What the 26 does have is for non-hand loaders to have a round that will do the "flat to 400" from factory guns with factory ammo.
It's much better as a 7mm or bigger.
sable tireur
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,944
These threads of comparison can be useful when the cartridges are comparable. But in some instances, the comparison lacks merit and doesn't generate any useful information.
This is one of those.
Why compare a cartridge with a case capacity of 82 grains of water with a cartridge having 93 grains of water? All that occurs is a large amount of gum beating about 'over bore' by many who lack the knowledge and comprehension of what that term actually means and how to apply it. In this day and age of VLD, RBBT, and the Hybrid bullets when combined with some of the newly designed, slower and cooler more efficiently burning powders, there is little resolution of one of these cartridges over the other.
The .264 Win. Mag. is a classic cartridge intentionally designed for longer range hunting. The biggest drawback was the lack of cooler, slower burning powders, earning it the reputation of being a 'Barrel Burner' which amounted to damnation by the general public. Nobody cares about the belt anymore because we work around it by headspacing on the shoulder and using properly calibrated dies for resizing. I'm running one currently in a benchrest rifle for 1,000 yard targets and it is performing admirably for a supposed 'Barrel Burner'.
The 6.5 WSM in the standard form has 82 grains of water capacity also. It too, will run with the .264 Win. Mag. and uses similar powders and bullets depending on magazine length or single feeding. I'm currently running one of these as well.
The 6.5 SAUM by GAP (72 grains) is running a step behind both of these but is performing above expectations in velocity and barrel life when the suggested loads and common sense are used.
The 26 Nosler is simply not in the same ball game as the others. Like most large capacity cartridges, it requires slower powders which burn cooler and most importantly, a longer barrel in which to burn all of that slow powder. If you don't want to use a longer barrel then stop trying to compare apples to oranges. The similar comparison here would be with the 6.5 Prometheus cartridge.
These cartridges need to utilize the heavier bullets and much slower powders since pressure rises as the capacity increases and the case mouth diameter decreases. This combined with the longer barrels yields a fairly efficient cartridge but not comparable to the lesser capacity cartridges.
If you absolutely have to have the greatest efficiency and reasonable performance get the 6.5 Creedmoor, the .260 Rem. or the 6.5 Swede. But stop maligning the large capacity cases simple because you don't understand the proper comparison.
Regards.
This is one of those.
Why compare a cartridge with a case capacity of 82 grains of water with a cartridge having 93 grains of water? All that occurs is a large amount of gum beating about 'over bore' by many who lack the knowledge and comprehension of what that term actually means and how to apply it. In this day and age of VLD, RBBT, and the Hybrid bullets when combined with some of the newly designed, slower and cooler more efficiently burning powders, there is little resolution of one of these cartridges over the other.
The .264 Win. Mag. is a classic cartridge intentionally designed for longer range hunting. The biggest drawback was the lack of cooler, slower burning powders, earning it the reputation of being a 'Barrel Burner' which amounted to damnation by the general public. Nobody cares about the belt anymore because we work around it by headspacing on the shoulder and using properly calibrated dies for resizing. I'm running one currently in a benchrest rifle for 1,000 yard targets and it is performing admirably for a supposed 'Barrel Burner'.
The 6.5 WSM in the standard form has 82 grains of water capacity also. It too, will run with the .264 Win. Mag. and uses similar powders and bullets depending on magazine length or single feeding. I'm currently running one of these as well.
The 6.5 SAUM by GAP (72 grains) is running a step behind both of these but is performing above expectations in velocity and barrel life when the suggested loads and common sense are used.
The 26 Nosler is simply not in the same ball game as the others. Like most large capacity cartridges, it requires slower powders which burn cooler and most importantly, a longer barrel in which to burn all of that slow powder. If you don't want to use a longer barrel then stop trying to compare apples to oranges. The similar comparison here would be with the 6.5 Prometheus cartridge.
These cartridges need to utilize the heavier bullets and much slower powders since pressure rises as the capacity increases and the case mouth diameter decreases. This combined with the longer barrels yields a fairly efficient cartridge but not comparable to the lesser capacity cartridges.
If you absolutely have to have the greatest efficiency and reasonable performance get the 6.5 Creedmoor, the .260 Rem. or the 6.5 Swede. But stop maligning the large capacity cases simple because you don't understand the proper comparison.
Regards.
gkempf
Well-Known Member
Sable, Please forgive me for my ignorance. I am just a common guy with some questions and have never once poured water in any of my brass. Thanks for your comments and sorry to waste your time.
264WM
Well-Known Member
If this thread annoys you so much why on earth do you take the time and space to read and comment on it. Please you have our permission to read a thread more to your liking.
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
sable tireur
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,944
264WM,
Nowhere did I state that I was annoyed. I simply stated that the way the thread was moving was in the wrong direction. Then I tried to carefully craft an answer which was in the vein of proper comparison. Sometimes the written word is misunderstood in short form.
MudRunner2005,
I was merely trying to clear up the confusion of the comparison. As I have stated on many occasions, it's difficult to tackle complex ideas in such explanations without taking the chance of offending someone. I have no intention of offending members at all but I do try to pass on factual information and explanations based on extensive experience. It is unfortunate that what I wrote was taken in the wrong way.
Regards.
Nowhere did I state that I was annoyed. I simply stated that the way the thread was moving was in the wrong direction. Then I tried to carefully craft an answer which was in the vein of proper comparison. Sometimes the written word is misunderstood in short form.
MudRunner2005,
I was merely trying to clear up the confusion of the comparison. As I have stated on many occasions, it's difficult to tackle complex ideas in such explanations without taking the chance of offending someone. I have no intention of offending members at all but I do try to pass on factual information and explanations based on extensive experience. It is unfortunate that what I wrote was taken in the wrong way.
Regards.
adam32
Well-Known Member
I understood what you wrote, and I agree 100%. gun)
Likewise! It's the type of information required to conduct a thorough comparative analysis. As an analyst, I really appreciate it.
He took the time to provide you (I included) a very good analysis, what you do with that information is entirely up to you.
I learned early on that there are folks here that are smarter than I am, have far more experience than I am, and always willing and able help.
Cheers!
